166 sats \ 13 replies \ @BitByBit21 17 Nov 2023 \ on: Argentina Presidential Election: Who will win? bitcoin
Never trust a politician, even if they're pro Bitcoin.
Vote Bitcoin, that’s where your interest lies!
reply
I think folks miss the meaning of trust.
Trust: Firm belief in the integrity, ability, or character of a person or thing; confidence or reliance.
Now you tell me, does that definition apply to the vast majority of politicians? Are you going to rely on a politician? Do you believe they have integrity? Or are they just telling you what you want to hear. Its a personal question. Ron Paul is the only politician that never really disappointed me. He's the exception and I still didn't trust him. I just wish there were more like him. The incentives of politicians are to tell people what they want to hear, make promises they can't keep so they can gain wealth, power, and influence. Don't kid yourselves. Bitcoiners should understand incentives.
As the number and financial power of bitcoiners rises across the globe MANY politicians are going to become "pro bitcoin". Stay skeptical. I'm not telling you to not vote but don't be fooled. Where we're going we don't need them. They need us.
reply
Milei is the argentinian Ron Paul. I don't trust him, but he's in politics and despises politicians. He for example has never (allegedly) received one dime from the State, he donates 100% of his state remuneration.
reply
I hope you are right. If so, this will be good for the people there.
reply
You're talking about Milei right. He's never stated he's pro-Bitcoin, one might conclude that because he's in favor of currency competition and against legal tender, and despises the central bank.
He's also not a politician even though he put himself in that rat nest.
reply
Fair enough. I just don't expect that people in the government fixes anything. The system is too big and their incentives are too corrupt.
reply
Agree with you. I'm not placing my hopes there. But I'd rather have a Bukele than a Lula.
reply
When you choose the lesser of two evils you're still choosing evil.
reply
Are you suggesting it doesn't matter because it's evil all the same?
reply
It's not a suggestion, it's a fact. But I respect people who think they have a choice if that's their thing. I just think that things are not going to change following the same old path. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
reply
I know where you are coming from because I barely follow any politics. I don't see it as the solution either.
However, you are saying that it's a fact that it doesn't matter which politician gets into office. That is childish and preposterous.
Yes, it makes a huge difference who the country's power is in the hands of. You're basically saying that it's the same living in South Korea than in North Korea.
reply
I'm just saying that the sentence "choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil" is a fact, based on logic. But I understand that my point may seem preposterous, so it might require a deeper explanation.
From my point of view, the problem is not who's in charge but the fact that we need someone in charge. Regardless of who's in charge, the problem is the same: the government as a coercive institution. Of course there are different types of government, so comparing North and South Korea is not fair: the former is a dictatorship and the latter is a democracy (even though both are power institutions).
So I'm talking about modern democracies, where people consider they have a choice. Things may change on the surface every four years or so, but the problem is still the same: someone surrounded by a small group of people is making decisions for millions of other people. In theory this should work, if it was regulated by a system of social control, based on justice and equality. But it isn't. In practice we're seeing that our democracies are a total failure regardless of who gets into office.
Enter the populists swearing they can change the system from within. They play with people's hope and finally succumb to the same corrupt system of incentives. The powerful elites get more power and the hopeless crowd are increasingly weaker, expecting and praying for their savior. And restart.
Perhaps all this is pointless if I don't propose an alternative method. So far the only way I've found to fight all this in an actionable manner is Bitcoin, which is based on the principle of rules without rulers. I don't know if it will succeed in changing our societies but at least it shows me an alternative path. So I don't expect anymore that the government or the financial institutions grant me their permission to have some dignity. Maybe we could build new societies on that principle.